Saturday, October 11, 2008


I came across the following PDF while I was clearing up my PC hard drive. I really do not know how to transfer a PDF file to this blog, and besides, I am also not certain about publication rights etc. However the details are here. I had forgotten that I even had it. I have re-read the majority of it...80 pages. Here is the Contents list and a few choice paragraphs. It is scary reading this sort of stuff. To think these people are amongst us...and yes I believe they are here in Australia as well. It is becoming more evident as time passes.


Acknowledgements 1
Methodology 2
Foreword 7
R. James Woolsey
Introduction 11
Nina Shea
One Christians, Jews and Other “Infidels” 19
Two Jews 29
Three Other Muslims 34
Four Anti-American 39
Five Infidel Conspiracies 48
Six Jihad Ideology 57
Seven Suppression of Women 63
Notes 68
Bibliography 72
List of Sources 78
Appendices 80

Adobe Acrobat Document
558 KB
Author: Bauer - from
Center for Religious Freedom
Freedom House
1319 18th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-296-5101
Fax: 202-296-5078


Several hate-filled publications in this study were also gathered from the Institute of Islamic and Arabic Sciences in Fairfax, Virginia.

The Saudi-funded, Wahhabi-operated export of hatred for us reaches around the globe. It is well known that the religious schools of Pakistan that educated a large share of the Taliban and al Qaeda are Wahhabi. But Pakistan is not the sole target. I had in my office recently a moderate Muslim leader from an Asian country. He was in the U.S., seeking to obtain funds from foundations, so that he could have printed elementary school textbooks to compete with the Wahhabi-funded textbooks that are flooding his country and that are being made available to schools at little or no cost. The Wahhabi textbooks in his country, like textbooks in Saudi Arabia, teach that it is the obligation of all Muslims to consider all infidels the enemy. As an illustration of the consequences of such teaching, I have heard that in some cases during the fighting in Bosnia in the early nineties, American churches and synagogues that were raising funds for food and other aid for the Bosnian Muslims would approach local mosques and suggest a cooperative effort. On a number of occasions they were turned down and didn’t understand why. The reason was that for a Wahhabi Imam (and Sheikh Kabbani, perhaps the U.S.’s leading moderate Muslim leader, says that a substantial percentage of American mosques have Wahhabi-funded Imams), it is normally not believed to be permissible for Muslims to work with infidels, even if the purpose is to help Muslims. I don’t believe at all that this attitude reflects the views of a substantial number of American Muslims, but it may indicate one way that the Wahhabi reach extends into this country as well.

One analogue for Wahhabism’s political influence today might be the extremely angry form taken by much of German nationalism in the period after WW I. Not all angry and extreme German nationalists (or their sympathizers in the U.S.) in that period were or became Nazis. But just as angry and extreme German nationalism of that period was the soil in which Nazism grew, Wahhabi and Islamist extremism today is the soil in which al Qaeda and its sister terrorist organizations are growing. We need to recognize the problem posed by the international spread of this hate ideology, including within the American homeland.

I have just watched / doco on the History Channel that ran along the lines of how the nazis came to use the swastika and other emblems that were from the runes of paganism...ED.

On December 3, 2004, Ahmed, an Arab exchange student, walks down a palm-lined boulevard in a working class neighborhood of Los Angeles. Since it is Friday, he bypasses the Hispanic restaurants, the 7/11, and the sporting goods store, and enters the King Fahd mosque – an elegant building of white marble etched with gold, adorned by a blue minaret, that is named after its benefactor, the King of Saudi Arabia. Later he will join 500 other California Muslims in prayer but, because it is early, he visits the mosque library where he picks up several books on religious guidance, written in Arabic, that are offered free to Muslims like him, newly arrived and uncertain on how to fit into this modern, diverse land.
The tracts he opens are in the voice of a senior religious authority. They tell him that America, his adoptive home, is the “Abode of the Infidel,” the Christian and the Jew. He reads:
“Be dissociated from the infidels, hate them for their religion, leave them, never rely on them for support, do not admire them, and always oppose them in every way according to Islamic law.”
The advice is emphatic: “There is consensus on this matter, that whoever helps unbelievers against Muslims, regardless of what type of support he lends to them, he is an unbeliever himself.”
As he reads this warning, Ahmed thinks back to the U.S. government’s request to the American Muslim community for their voluntary cooperation in the fight against terrorism and he is afraid. He knows that the tracts’ author views such officials as “unbelievers,” so that, if he helped them, he would be an unbeliever himself, a renegade, an apostate from Islam who should therefore be put to death. He begins to worry too about his cousin, an American citizen who recently enlisted in the U.S. military.
The books give him detailed instructions on how to build a “wall of resentment” between himself and the infidel: Never greet the Christian or Jew first. Never congratulate the infidel on his holiday. Never befriend an infidel unless it is to convert him. Never imitate the infidel. Never work for an infidel. Do not wear a graduation gown because this imitates the infidel.
Ahmed looks carefully at the book’s cover. It says “Greetings from the Cultural Department” of the Embassy of Saudi Arabia in Washington, D.C. The book is published by the government of Saudi Arabia. The other books are textbooks from the Saudi Education Ministry, and collections of fatwas, religious edicts, issued by the government’s religious office, published by other organizations based in Riyadh.

In another book he reads that, if relations between Muslims and non-Muslims were harmonious, there would be “no loyalty and enmity, no more jihad and fighting to raise Allah’s work on earth.”
Ahmed’s experience is repeated, not only in Saudi Arabia and the notorious madrassas of Pakistan, but throughout America: the texts he read have been spread from coast to coast and now fill the libraries and study halls of some of America’s main mosques. To be sure, not all the books in such mosques espouse extremism and not all extremist works are Saudi. Saudi Arabia, however, is overwhelmingly the state most responsible for the publications on the ideology of hate in America.
The Center for Religious Freedom has gathered samples of over 200 such texts over the last twelve months -- all from American mosques and all spread, sponsored or otherwise generated by Saudi Arabia. They demonstrate the ongoing indoctrination of Muslims in the United States in the hostility and belligerence of Saudi Arabia’s hardline Wahhabi sect of Islam.
All Saudis must be Muslim, and the Saudi government, in collaboration with the country’s religious establishment, enforces and imposes Wahhabism as the official state doctrine. 14 In 2004, the United States State Department designated Saudi Arabia as a “Country of Particular Concern” under the International Religious Freedom Act after finding for many years that “religious freedom did not exist” in the Kingdom.15 The Saudi policy of denying religious freedom is explained in one of the tracts in this study: “Freedom of thinking requires permitting the denial of faith and attacking what is sacred, glorifying falsehood and defending the heretics, finding fault in religion and letting loose the ideas and pens to write of disbelief as one likes, and to put ornaments on sin as one likes.”
The Wahhabism that the Saudi monarchy enforces, and on which it bases its legitimacy, is shown in these documents as a fanatically bigoted, xenophobic and sometimes violent ideology.16 These publications articulate its wrathful dogma, rejecting the coexistence of different religions and explicitly condemning Christians, Jews, all other non-Muslims, as well as non-Wahhabi Muslims. The various Saudi publications gathered for this study state that it is a religious obligation for Muslims to hate Christians and Jews and warn against imitating, befriending, or helping such “infidels” in any way, or taking part in their festivities and celebrations. They instill contempt for America because the United States is ruled by legislated civil law rather than by totalitarian Wahhabi-style Islamic law. Some of the publications collected for this study direct Muslims not to take American citizenship as long as the country is ruled by infidels and tells them, while abroad, above all, to work for the creation of an Islamic state. The Saudi textbooks and documents spread throughout American mosques preach a Nazi-like hatred for Jews, treat the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion as historical fact, and avow that the Muslim’s duty is to eliminate the state of Israel. Regarding women, the Saudi state publications in America instruct that they should be veiled, segregated from men and barred from certain employment and roles.

Much of the commentary in the West on Wahhabi hate ideology is restricted to shallow statements that it is “strict” or “puritanical.” The Saudi publications in this study show that there is much more of concern to Americans in this ideology than rigid sexual codes. They show that it stresses a dualistic worldview in which there exist two antagonistic realms or abodes that can never be reconciled -- Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Har, or Abode of War (also called Dar al-Kufr, Abode of the Infidel) -- and that when Muslims are in the latter, they must behave as if on a mission behind enemy lines. Either they are there to acquire new knowledge and make money to be later employed in the jihad against the infidels, or they are there to proselytize the infidels until at least some convert to Islam. Any other reason for lingering among the unbelievers in their lands is illegitimate, and unless a Muslim leaves as quickly as possible, he or she is not a true Muslim and so too must be condemned.

One example of how Saudi Arabia asserts its self-appointed role as the authoritative interpreter of Islam within the Muslim world is provided in a collection of fatwas published by the Saudi Embassy’s Cultural Department in Washington. Its one-page introduction laments the dearth of competent Islamic scholars among Muslim emigrant communities abroad, and the confusion this has caused about Islamic beliefs and worship. The opening line reads, “The emigrant Muslim communities suffer in these countries from a lack of religious scholars (ulema).” It states that this deplorable situation has led the highest committee of Islamic scholars in the Kingdom to offer authoritative replies to questions frequently asked by Muslims living in the non-Muslim world. These replies are given in authoritative pronouncements that the introduction urges should be official guides for preachers, mosque imams, and students living far from the Kingdom.

Saudi Wahhabism is dominant in many American mosques. Singapore’s main newspaper recently published an interview with Sheik Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, the Lebanese-American chairman of the Islamic Supreme Council of America, based in Washington, D.C.: “Back in 1990, arriving for his first Friday prayers in an American mosque in Jersey City, he was shocked to hear Wahhabism being preached. ‘What I heard there, I had never heard in my native Lebanon. I asked myself: Is Wahhabism active in America? So I started my research. Whichever mosque I went to, it was Wahhabi, Wahhabi, Wahhabi, Wahhabi.’”20

The publications in this study, found in some of America’s most important mosques, pose a grave threat to non-Muslims and to the Muslim community itself. They now have become a matter of national security since 15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers were Saudi subjects indoctrinated from young ages in just such Wahhabi ideology, possibly from the very same textbooks and fatwa collections. Saudi state curriculum for many years has taught children to hate “the other” and support jihad, a malleable term that is used by terrorists to describe and justify their atrocities. For example, a book for third-year high school students published by the Saudi Ministry of Education that was collected from the Islamic Center of Oakland in California, teaches students, including even now some American Muslims, to prepare for jihad in the sense of war against Islam’s enemies, and to strive to attain military self-sufficiency: “To be true Muslims, we must prepare and be ready for jihad in Allah’s way. It is the duty of the citizen and the government. The military education is glued to faith and its meaning, and the duty to follow it.”
The same hostility toward “infidels” propagated in official Saudi Islamic publications and fatwas surfaces repeatedly in statements by Muslim terrorists.21 A prime example occurred on May 29 and 30, 2004, when a terrorist squad went through the compound of foreigners in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, segregating the Muslims from the non-Muslims (mainly Christians and Hindus) before slitting the throats of the latter, and in some cases, beheading them. To the remaining terrified Muslims the slaughterers calmly explained how certain verses in the Koran should be read and understood to preach hatred of “unbelievers.” Their explicit aim was to cleanse the land of Mohammad of Christians and polytheists.22 While Saudi officials were quick to denounce this ruthless act of terror, it followed logically from the state’s relentless indoctrination in hate ideology.
The Saudis’ totalitarian doctrine of religious hatred – now planted in many America mosques -- is inimical to our tolerant culture, and undermines the war on terrorism by providing the intellectual foundation for a new generation of Islamic extremists.23 Several of the Saudi embassy titles in this study are expressly aimed at the immigrant and traveler. It should be remembered that the leaders of the 9/11 hijackers were themselves immigrants and became radicalized in the West.24 And while our Los Angeles mosque-goer Ahmed is fictitious, Saudi hijackers Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar are not. Upon their arrival in America, they promptly made the King Fahd mosque the center of their lives, the base from which they received assistance, made friends, and no doubt could find moral reinforcement -- perhaps including from the mosque reading material -- to justify their planned terror mission against New York’s twin towers. Fahad al Thumairy, a King Fahd mosque imam at that time, was a well-known Wahhabi extremist and Saudi diplomat whom the U.S. expelled for suspected terrorism in 2003.
Recent converts with limited experience of Islam can be particularly susceptible to the Saudi publications’ toxic message.26 Adam Gadahn, thought to be the “American jihadi” who appeared in a mask on a videotape just before the 2004 elections threatening that America’s street would “run with blood,” had converted to Islam and became radicalized after spending hours studying Islam with seven or eight other young men at the Islamic Society of Orange County in California, the mosque chairman is quoted telling the Washington Post. We cannot tell precisely what he and his group were reading, but the mosque chairman told the Post: ‘“They were very rigid, cruel in talking to people….’ They criticized [the chair] for wearing Western clothes, for not wearing a beard, for trying to reach out to the local Jewish communities. Seizing on his American nickname, Danny, they circulated fliers around the mosque calling him ‘Danny the Jew.’”27 This attitude reflects perfectly the teachings given by the Saudi embassy in several of the documents in our collection, copies of which were gathered from, among other places, the very Orange County Islamic Society where Gadhan studied.

Not only does the government of Saudi Arabia not have a right – under the First Amendment or any other legal document – to spread hate ideology within U.S. borders, it is committing a human rights violation by doing so. A government that advocates religious intolerance and hatred violates the religious freedom and tolerance provisions of Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Planted as authoritative reading materials in some of America’s most prominent mosques (many of which also receive Saudi state support) these state-backed publications, in effect, represent a continuing breach of international law.

Freedom House wholeheartedly endorses the recommendation made by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom for an official study of the Saudi export of hate ideology around the world.

Pages 19 and 20.
Wahhabis, the followers of Saudi Arabia’s established and extreme version of Sunni Islam, condemn as “infidels” all non-Muslims. The Saudi state denies them rights to practice their religions within the country. In the Saudi Wahhabi literature found in the United States Christians and Jews are often paired together for attack. They are portrayed as infidels par excellence: not to be greeted first, not to be taken as friends, and not to be imitated.
To Wahhabis, Christianity is considered polytheistic and its doctrine of the Trinity represents an ultimate expression of blasphemy: deifying Jesus and associating other created entities with the one God (shirk). Moreover, Christianity stirs up images of crusaders and colonialists and is the dominant religion throughout the “Abode of Unbelief,” in particular America.
The Wahhabi literature published and distributed by Saudi Arabia is replete with condemnations of Christians and their beliefs, and directs Muslims to actively hate them. The Saudi state’s religious authorities promote an us-versus-them mentality among Muslims that extends to social, cultural and political matters, far beyond the realm of religious doctrine. One Saudi government document [Document No. 2], collected from a San Diego mosque, expresses the need to maintain a “wall of resentment” between Muslims and non-Muslims. If the “wall” were to come down through amity, jihad (holy war) would end, as that particular tract makes explicit. San Diego mosque-goers are instructed by this Saudi publication that:
“[I]t is basic Islam to believe that everyone who does not embrace Islam is an unbeliever, and must be called an unbeliever, and that they are enemies to Allah, his Prophet and believers.” [Document No. 2]
In a book entitled Reality of Monotheism and Polytheism, [Document No. 40] published by the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs, copies of which were found at the Al-Farouq Mosque in Brooklyn, New York, the late Saudi official, Grand Mufti Bin Baz, wrote that Islam since the time of Adam and through successive prophets has preached belief in Allah’s unity (tawheed). The Jews and Christians, however, became misguided unbelievers when they rejected Mohammed, despite the presence among them of some who proclaim God’s unity.
According to the Wahhabi view, it is a Muslim’s religious duty to cultivate enmity between oneself and unbelievers. Hatred of unbelievers is the proof that the believer has completely dissociated from them. A work entitled Loyalty and Dissociation in Islam [Document No. 45], compiled by the Ibn Taymiya Library in Riyadh and distributed by the King Fahd-supported Islamic Center of Washington, D.C., states emphatically:
“To be dissociated from the infidels is to hate them for their religion, to leave them, never to rely on them for support, not to admire them, to be on one’s guard against them, never to imitate them, and to always oppose them in every way according to Islamic law.” [Document No. 45]
The Saudi Air Force publishing house has issued a series of hate-filled fatwas pronounced by Bin Baz and another of Saudi Arabia’s most prominent writers on religious questions, Sheik Mohammad al-Salih Ibn al-‘Athimein (died in 2000), aimed at Muslim travelers and emigrants. The Cultural Department of the Saudi Arabian Embassy in Washington distributed this 140-page book [Document No. 52] in the United States. Copies were collected from a number of different sources. It contains virulent denunciations of Christians and of the infidelity of their beliefs and practices. It offers intricate guidelines concerning the proper relations Muslims should have with non-Muslims while they reside in the latter’s “lands of shirk and kufr” (i.e. lands of idolatry and infidelity).
The opening question in the embassy-distributed booklet, entitled “Rulings for Travelers and Emigrants” captures the extreme intolerance of the Saudi ideology. The fatwa responds to a question that seeks clarity regarding a Muslim preacher in an unspecified mosque in Europe who “claims in a study of his that declaring Jews and Christians infidels is not allowed.” The Saudi state cleric’s reply rebukes the unnamed European cleric: “He who casts doubts about their infidelity leaves no doubt about his own infidelity” [Document No. 52]. This condemnation of tolerant Muslims also appears in the religious edicts of Saudi Arabia’s Permanent Committee for Scientific Research and the Issuing of Fatwas, collected from the Masjid Abu Bakr mosque in San Diego: “[T]he one who does not call the Jews and the Christians unbelievers is himself an unbeliever” [Document No. 2].
This raises the issue of takfir, accusing individuals or groups of blasphemy and condemning them for infidelity; included are other Muslims regarded by the fanatics as apostates. This is the most serious denunciation that could be made of another Muslim because Wahhabis believe apostates should be put to death, and it could be interpreted by fanatics as justification for murder. At a minimum, Wahhabi hardliners delegitimize and intimidate their Muslim opponents by labeling them as “infidels” or “apostates.”
The first fatwa in the Saudi Embassy book [Document No. 52], condemning tolerant Muslims, is followed by selective Koranic verses that spell out the infidelity of Jews and Christians and condemn them to the eternal fires of hell. One quotation from Ibn Taymiya, also known as Sheik al-Islam, a medieval extremist frequently invoked by Osama bin Laden, offers support for the charge of infidelity made against Christians and Jews:

Is a Muslim allowed to read the Gospels? Only if he is so well versed in his own Islamic faith and aims solely to point out the internal contradictions therein by exposing the tampering to which these Christian texts have been subjected [Document No. 52].

One questioner inquired about whether to accept an invitation from Protestant acquaintances to attend a church service with them. He stressed that, being Protestant, they had no statues or pictures in their church, and there would be no genuflecting before images and crosses or during rituals. The Saudi reply is that this is permissible only if accompanying them to their church can be used as a prelude to da’wa, or calling them to embrace Islam, and provided one does not share any of their beliefs and remains immune to their influences in every way [Document No. 52].

From a Saudi publication [Document No. 45] gathered from the crown-supported Islamic Center of Washington, Muslims are warned that those who choose to reside in the lands of unbelief will be considered infidels and “enemies” of Allah if they either compliment non-Muslims or are critical of Muslims:
“Those who reside in the land of unbelief out of their own choice and desire to be with the people of that land, accepting the way they are regarding their faith, or giving compliments to them, or pleasing them by pointing out something wrong with the Muslims, they become unbelievers and enemies to Allah and his messenger.” [Document No. 45]
This document invokes the two-Abodes motif in order to underscore the utter incompatibility between the lands of Islam and those of infidelity. Similarly, believers are exhorted to depart from infidel lands (hijra) if they cannot establish Islamic beliefs and practices in those lands and are able to immigrate back to the Abode of Islam.
The Saudi literature is bent on instilling in its followers the conviction that whenever they are not in Saudi Arabia or other Islamic countries, they are in enemy territory and accordingly should struggle to establish Islam, or else return to the Islamic world.

The Saudi publications also instruct Muslims that it is preferable not to hire non-Muslims, especially within the Arabian Peninsula, but, if they do, they have to hate them. In fatwas on the “Treatment of Servants,” published [Document No. 36] by the Saudi Embassy to Washington and collected from the Islamic Center in East Orange, N.J., the late Saudi Grand Mufti Bin Baz states the following about how to handle an infidel domestic worker:
“The women in your household do not have to stay away from her, but they should not treat her as they would treat a Muslim woman. They have to hate her for Allah’s sake….” [Document No. 36]

The apparent intent of the Saudi embassy document is to frighten Muslims in America into living lives aloof and alienated from the rest of society. Again the implication is that common politeness shown by the Muslim to a non-Muslim could be tantamount to infidelity or apostasy and deserve death.

In response to questions from Muslims living in the West about how they should interact with non-Muslims, the Saudi government experts on the Permanent Committee, including Grand Mufti Bin Baz and al-‘Athimein, offer a range of replies largely advising a mixture of suspicion, hostility, and aggressive proselytism. Their fatwas have been found in mosques throughout the United States. Specific instructions are given by Saudi state religious authorities on how Muslims can demonstrate hostility.

Many Muslims come to the West to conduct business or to study. Saudi religious authorities would allow such forays into the Abode of Unbelief only if those undertaking them were solid in their Islamic faith and could be counted on to proselytize, were accruing earnings that would be used to benefit the Muslims, or were acquiring knowledge that would eventually strengthen the cause of Islam. Still, the Saudi documents [Documents Nos. 44 & 52] assert, dangers lurk everywhere, and the Muslim must anticipate the enmity of the unbelievers by being wary of their wiles and tricks. Take, for instance, the situation where a Muslim student is expected to be the first to greet a Christian of a prominent rank such as a university professor. A Saudi document gathered from the American mosque warns that under no circumstances is such a violation allowed [Documents No. 52].

One Muslim residing in the West inquires whether an infidel can be given a copy of the holy Koran. Since this is part of the da’wa, or call to Islam, that Muslims ought to be engaged in while in the lands of unbelief, it is permissible to give the infidel a copy of the Koran. The Saudis have their own, unique Wahhabi translation of the Koran. This translation adds some harsh condemnations of Christians and Jews not found in the original language of the Koran.41

So much for interfaith dialogue……………….ED.

Western churches have increasingly called for greater unity among world religions and interfaith dialogue, but the Saudi Arabian authoritative religious office is adamant. The government’s Permanent Committee finds no common ground. Islam is the final and most perfect religion and by its coming all previous religions, including Judaism and Christianity, have been nullified. The Saudi text asserts that the Koran has rendered both the Torah and the Gospels obsolete because they were tampered with and altered by wicked or wayward men. The call to greater unity among religions is therefore sinful since it erases the radical differences between Islam and systems of unbelief. The Saudi text, distributed in the San Diego mosque declares,
“It is basic to the belief of Islam that everyone who does not embrace Islam is an unbeliever and must be called an unbeliever and that they are enemies to Allah, his Prophet and the believers….That is why the one who does not call the Jews and the Christian unbelievers [Document No. 2].

If anyone would like the full thing then I would be glad to email it to you.

1 comment:

  1. A number of the issues in this post describe many of the 'authentic' Islamic laws. These laws have been studied and ruled upon by Islamic scholars for 1400 years and have been found to be 'authentic'. In other words, they were spoken by Mohammed. This requires all true Muslims to follow. To do otherwise is to be an Apostate. The death penalty is 'authentic' on this issue as well. Dealing with Islam is a one-way street in many ways.